Proposal : Order, Order

[ We're getting too many Calls for Judgment over issues where the rule-breaker wouldn't have even contested the call - we should only need to take something to a CfJ if two people are actively disputing a rule's interpretation.

I think rule-breaking can be covered as it would be in a game of Monopoly or chess; undo its effects if it's an obvious breach, question it if you're not sure. If there's a difference of opinion, take it to a formal CfJ and let the rest of the players cast judgment. ]

Reword Rule 6 (Call for Judgment) to:-

"If two or more Players actively disagree as to the interpretation of the Ruleset, any Player may raise a Call for Judgment by posting an entry which begins with the paragraph "Call for Judgment" in bold text, and goes on to describe the disagreement, and measures that should be taken to correct it.

All Players may add votes of agreement or disagreement in comments to this entry, using appropriate voting icons. If more than half of the Players' votes (their later votes overriding their earlier) are in favour, the Gamestate and Ruleset should be amended as was specified. If more than half disagree, the CfJ fails and may have no further effect."

Enacted by Myke, Tuesday the 18th, 10 Points to Kevan, 5 Points to Myke